Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

The role of academic health centres to inform evidence-based integrative oncology practice

Nature Reviews Cancer volume 15, page 247 (2015)Cite this article

Subjects

Access through your institution
Buy or subscribe

David H. Gorski has written an Opinion article challenging the value of integrative oncology (Integrative oncology: really the best of both worlds? Nature Rev. Cancer 14, 692–700 (2014))1. While we agree with some of his critiques of alternative medicine, his synthesis of the literature does not reflect the state of the science and evidence of current integrative oncology research and practice. For example, he called acupuncture “pseudoscience” but failed to appraise recent relevant translational neuroscience literature on the mechanisms of acupuncture. Using functional brain imaging techniques, researchers have found that acupuncture techniques affect neural networks that are critical to pain processing and emotional regulation2,3. These findings enhance our understanding of not only the mechanism underlying acupuncture but also the neurophysiological basis of chronic pain. In a recent patient-level meta-analysis of 17,922 individuals with chronic pain, researchers found that acupuncture was more efficacious than sham acupuncture and standard medical care for pain management4. Gorski's interpretation was that acupuncture did not produce minimal clinically important effects and was therefore not useful overall. Our interpretation is that if a patient does not respond to current medical regimens (such as drugs or interventional pain procedures) or prefers to avoid polypharmacy5, acupuncture is an acceptable option based on existing evidence.

As physicians and scientists, we aspire to use science to inform the practice of medicine and improve patient outcomes. In order to achieve this, evidence-based medicine requires that we combine research findings, clinical experience, and the patient's unique preferences, values and circumstances6,7. Gorski's dismissal of the field of integrative oncology reflects a poor understanding of this emerging field. A large population-based study found that 60% of patients with cancer use one or more types of complementary or integrative medicine (typically for wellness, immune enhancement and pain management), which is a higher rate than that seen in the general population8. Because of patient preference and demand, the field of integrative oncology, led by academic health centres and cancer centres, has emerged to address the challenges of evidence-based practice. These centres aim to perform rigorous research to understand the mechanisms of complementary and integrative practices, and to evaluate their potential benefit and harm. They also aim to educate patients and trainees, and to develop sustainable models of clinical practice so that selected complementary therapies (based on greater potential benefit than risk) can be practised along with, or “integrated” into, conventional cancer care9. A recent exemplar of this effort is the Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monograph issue, entitled The Role of Integrative Oncology in Cancer Survivorship, which was jointly edited by members of the Society for Integrative Oncology and the Consortium of Academic Health Centers for Integrative Medicine and Health10.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access through your institution

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Gorski, D. Integrative oncology: really the best of both worlds? Nature Rev. Cancer 14, 692–700 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Napadow, V. et al. Brain correlates of phasic autonomic response to acupuncture stimulation: an event-related fMRI study. Hum. Brain Mapp. 34, 2592–2606 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Huang, W. et al. Characterizing acupuncture stimuli using brain imaging with FMRI — a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. PLoS ONE 7, e32960 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Vickers, A. J. et al. Acupuncture for chronic pain: individual patient data meta-analysis. Arch. Intern. Med. 172, 1444–1453 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Mao, J. J. et al. Acupuncture for hot flashes: decision making by breast cancer survivors. J. Am. Board Fam. Med. 25, 323–332 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Montori, V. M., Brito, J. P. & Murad, M. H. The optimal practice of evidence-based medicine: incorporating patient preferences in practice guidelines. JAMA 310, 2503–2504 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hoffmann, T. C., Montori, V. M. & Del Mar, C. The connection between evidence-based medicine and shared decision making. JAMA 312, 1295–1296 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mao, J. J., Palmer, C. S., Healy, K. E., Desai, K. & Amsterdam, J. Complementary and alternative medicine use among cancer survivors: a population-based study. J. Cancer Surviv. 5, 8–17 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kligler, B. & Chesney, M. Academic health centers and the growth of integrative medicine. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 50, 292–293 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mao, J. J. & Cohen, L. Advancing the science of integrative oncology to inform patient-centered care for cancer survivors. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 50, 283–284 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jun J. Mao is at the Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, USA.,

    Jun J. Mao

  2. Robert B. Saper is at Boston University School of Medicine, 72 East Concord Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02118, USA.,

    Robert B. Saper

  3. Margaret A. Chesney is at the Osher Center for Integrative Medicine, University of California School of Medicine, 1545 Divisadero Street, San Fransisco, California 94115, USA.,

    Margaret A. Chesney

Authors
  1. Jun J. Mao
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert B. Saper
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Margaret A. Chesney
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jun J. Mao.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mao, J., Saper, R. & Chesney, M. The role of academic health centres to inform evidence-based integrative oncology practice. Nat Rev Cancer 15, 247 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc3822-c3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc3822-c3

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Cancer

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Cancer